THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA WRIT PETITION No. 5950 of 2004 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T. Vinod Kumar This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order dated

31.12.2003 in L.G.C No.67 of 1999 passed by the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short ‘Act’).

2. The petitioners herein are the respondents in the L.G.C No.67 of 1999. The respondent No.2/applicant namely the State Government represented by MRO, initiated proceedings under Section 8(1) of the Act, to declare the petitioners/respondents as land grabbers in respect of land to an extent of Ac. 2-20 guntas in Sy. No. 93/1 of Mansoorabad village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and to deliver vacant possession of the same.

3. The respondent No.2/applicant, contended that the petitioners/respondents had unlawfully occupied Government land admeasuring Ac.2.20 guntas situated in Sy.No.93/1 of Mansoorabad Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and the land in question was classified as "Sarkari Poramboke," meant for public purposes, such as construction of Government buildings or quarters.

4. The respondent No.2/applicant contended that the father of the respondents, Kadamanchi Yellaiah, was in possession of agricultural land in Sy.Nos.92/1, 106, 114, 115, and 118 adjacent to Sy.No.93 and had taking advantage of proximity, illegally encroached upon the said government land. Upon discovery of the encroachment, the Mandal Revenue Officer (for short ‘MRO’) issued notice under Section 7 of the Act to substantiate his claim over the application schedule property, as respondents father failed to respond or appear, eviction orders were passed under Section 6 through Proceedings No.8/67/87 dated 28.12.1988. Subsequently, in 1997, father of the respondents re- encroached upon the application schedule property and constructed a house measuring 147 sq. yards. The concerned authorities again issued notice dated. 24-07-1997 and no explanation was given by the father of the respondents for the same.

5. The respondent No.2/applicant further contended that the application schedule property is not for assignment or regularization and that the petitioners/respondents continued unauthorized occupation of the land irrespective of the eviction which makes them liable to be declared as land grabbers under Act.

6. The respondents filed a common counter affidavit, denied all allegations made by the applicant. They refused the claim that their father, Kadamanchi Yellaiah, had encroached upon government land, instead contended that he was a bona fide possessor of the land in Sy.No.93/1. In support of their claim, the respondents contended that their father’s name was duly reflected in the revenue records of the years 1954-1955, thereby indicating continuous possession over the said land.

7. The petitioners/respondents contended that they claimed to have been in continuous, peaceful, and uninterrupted possession of the land for over 50 years, which had matured into ownership by way of adverse possession. The petitioners/respondents also contended that their family had developed the land by digging a borewell, constructing a residential house, obtaining electricity connection, and paying property taxes. The revenue and pahani documents (Exs.B1 to B63) evidences long possession and development of the land.

8. The petitioners/respondents also contended that the eviction proceedings in 1988 lacked evidentiary support and no panchanama or possession recovery documents were produced by the applicant. Further contended that others situated in surrounding lands was granted pattas by the government, and that they had also submitted applications for regularization, which were pending. The petitioners/respondents denied that they had ever acknowledged the State's title and claimed that payment of Sivai Jama Bandi (unauthorized cultivation penalty) was either forced or irregular, and did not amount to acknowledg